Spirit Airlines Boots Couple From Flight In Brouhaha Over Saggy Pants

Wearing what you want to wear on a flight so you can be comfortable is one thing, but is it worth verbally abusing a flight attendant and getting kicked off a plane? Spirit Airlines says a man got quite upset with an attendant after she asked him to pull up his sagging pants.

An airline spokeswoman said the man and a woman he was traveling with over the weekend threatened to physically harm the flight attendant who’d made the request. The attendant apparently said since they were hanging below his butt, they were “excessively low,” reports the Chicago Tribune.

While you’re free to choose your own apparel, the spokeswoman added that crew members may ask customers to comply with various requests if it’s in the best interest of the other customers. Their code says travelers have to wear shoes and “adequate” clothing. So in this case, the best interest the attendants saw was for no one else to see his backside, as it wasn’t being adequately covered by his pants.

Apparently the man didn’t feel like complying, so law enforcement officers arrived and escorted the two customers off the plane. The travelers apparently left on the next flight out. No word on whether he pulled his pants up for that trip.

So? Does it mean if you wear one now your husband owns you? People are allowed to wear what they want, even if it is ridiculously stupid (which I think baggy pants are). If you don’t like it, turn your head.

That’s it exactly. I see no valid reason to make saggy pants illegal, so long as whatever’s on under the pants is still adequately covering your butt and your bits.

However…there’s no reason that a private business can’t specify their own standards for dress code and enforce them. Like a nice pool hall I used to go to in college that had a simple dress code requiring collared shirts on men. That’s their right. Show up there in a t-shirt, and you don’t get in…and you have no legal basis to complain.

If you want to wear your saggy jeans to court then you’re probably good to go, as a governmental agency, AFAIK, can only enforce a “dress code” to what’s technically legal. I believe you could show up for your tax audit at the IRS office wearing the world’s tiniest thong bikini…and so long as it legally covered the naughty bits, there’s nothing they can do.

I’ve seen those dumb criminal videos where the guy trips over his pants trying to run away. What if you had to make your way off a plane in an emergency and the passenger in front of you tripped over his pants?

Ummm except for sagging pants are being outlawed left and right because it’s considered indecent exposure. I shouldn’t have to turn my head or cover my daughter’s eyes because we’re walking through the mall and some idiot in front of us has his whole ass hanging out of his pants. Covered by a thin pair of boxers or not, it’s still indecent. I don’t know about you, but I’m teaching my children NOT to show their underwear in public…

Oh my you’re hilarious! If you think that sporting a bathingsuit in a place where it’s appropriate is the same thing as showing your undies in a public setting…well I don’t quite know how to end that sentence.

“If you think that sporting a bathingsuit in a place where it’s appropriate is the same thing as showing your undies in a public setting…well, from a legal standpoint you’re correct so long as the undies provide adequate coverage as specified by the law.”

I am aware of the fact that some municipalities have declared it illegal. I do not believe they have sufficient legal grounds to do so, and if challenged in court, I would expect those laws to be overturned.

In any event, the veracity of my statement above still stands – since it ends with “…as specified by the law.” If there’s a law where you are against saggy pants, then you’re not wearing clothing “as specified by the law.”

If I can see your ass it’s indecent exposure. But only some money grubbing lawyer would even consider challenging it…none have yet and for sure the nappy thug wearing it that way don’t have the cash to anyway.

You’re correct that a number of communities have sought to outlaw saggy pants. But some lawmakers’ notion of what constitutes “indecent” exposure seems to have more to do with racism, than with what’s too racy. The article doesn’t say whether those kicked off the plane were African American, but the style of dress to which the flight attendant objected is clearly associated with young black males. The ALCU has challenged some of these “saggy pants” laws as a restriction on freedom of expression, and as racial profiling. The NAACP has criticized similar incidents of African Americans being kicked off flights as racist (including a well-publicized US Airways “saggy pants” case in 2011). I’m don’t much like the saggy pants style myself, but my tastes are irrelevant. I wouldn’t object to city ordinances or airline policies that provide that certain areas of the anatomy must be covered — as long as the rules are applied equally. Too often they aren’t, and for some who are making or enforcing the rules, race is a factor. To pretend otherwise is either disingenuous or naive.

We can only hope that somehow, someway, it will become true for
saggy-pants butt-crackers that do time. I refuse to believe that Snopes
is right (see below), I just choose to believe that they are wrong, so there.

Then they have to be enforced equally. If the issue is that the guy is showing his underwear, then if there’s some girl showing in too-short shorts or showing her underwear, she should have to be removed as well (despite my personal feelings). If the issue is that the guy is wearing something thug-ish, that’s not the basis to refuse someone (again, despite how I feel about those pants). I guess at some point the airline can specify a dress code, like employers do, but again, you’d need it to be sufficiently descriptive and equally enforced.

Was he showing his ass or underwear? If ass, then the FA was ok, if not mind your own fucking business. I hate seeing fat broads with stretch pants and crocs on a plane, but they do not kick them off. I hate seeing JimBob in camos, body odor from the hunt and no teeth, but he doesnt get kicked off. Seeing a kids boxers is not a big deal and if that is offensive to you, get a life.

I don’t care if you want to wear baggy pants, but the plane is someone’s place of business and they can set the standard of attire, including how its worn. Abide or move along. Becoming verbally abusive because someone asks you to comply? You’re an idiot and you deserve more than being allowed to take the next flight.

Yes, then they need to describe what that is and consistently enforce it. As to being abusive, yeah, not cool. But I can imagine the frustration as all sorts of other freaks are getting on the plan and you’re singled out.

What I don’t understand is what the big deal is about people’s underwear anyway. No one cares at the beach! It should be perfectly acceptable anywhere else. It’s not indecent exposure if they are covered up, end of story. As stupid as it may look, there are many other things that look stupid as well that are “perfectly acceptable” by societal standards. I don’t like mullet hair styles, but I’m not going to say they shouldn’t be allowed!

If these people want to unknowingly court themselves to others, like in the prison system, then that’s their own prerogative. Perhaps if someone told them the truth, then they would probably regret doing it in the first place!

The guy was loudly screaming (albeit visually) that he was proud to be an obnoxious a-hole, whatcha gonna do about it? What’s with the loud (in reality) screaming when somebody does do something about it?

Enter text…Assertion of facts not in evidence. Neither the Consumerist post nor the linked newspaper story mention underwear. You assume the guy was wearing underwear, but there’s no reason to assume that.

The “over Saggy Pants” is essentially a modifier to “Brouhaha.” It’s the brouhaha that got them booted…saggy pants is what the brouhaha was about. Not a red herring…it’s simply information about the brouhaha.

The guy was kicked off the plane for showing agrression- specifically to a flight attendant. I am sure there was a chance he could have remained if he politely declined her request.

Also all this discussion about sagging being illegal is not really due to actually seeing butts. Cities make it illegal to sag so cops can have a reason to stop people they suspect are drug dealers, gangs, etc. that typically have wear their pants to sag. Its specifically to profilining a certain group. This in itself is also quite lame because sagging pants is an urban style- a strong part of urban culture. Plenty of people that are not drug dealers or in gangs still can have pants sagging for their own reasons that are not illegal- aka Breakdancing artists, etc.

Travel has become a nightmare. I don’t know if it because we are treated like cattle by the airlines, or we have lost sight of our own obligations as humans. I just wish people would take the time to be respectful of others.

Look airlines… if this pants saggy idiot wants to look like an idiot. Let him. As long as his uncovered ass wasn’t out who cares!?! Somewhere someone thinks that whole saggy pants thing is still cool… but I don’t think it’s illegal or a reason to get the airline fashion police involved either.